Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Virology Journal 1/2021

Open Access 01-12-2021 | SARS-CoV-2 | Short report

False negative rate of COVID-19 PCR testing: a discordant testing analysis

Authors: Jamil N. Kanji, Nathan Zelyas, Clayton MacDonald, Kanti Pabbaraju, Muhammad Naeem Khan, Abhaya Prasad, Jia Hu, Mathew Diggle, Byron M. Berenger, Graham Tipples

Published in: Virology Journal | Issue 1/2021

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

COVID-19 is diagnosed via detection of SARS-CoV-2 RNA using real time reverse-transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (rtRT-PCR). Performance of many SARS-CoV-2 rtRT-PCR assays is not entirely known due to the lack of a gold standard. We sought to evaluate the false negative rate (FNR) and sensitivity of our laboratory-developed SARS-CoV-2 rtRT-PCR targeting the envelope (E) and RNA-dependent RNA-polymerase (RdRp) genes.

Methods

SARS-CoV-2 rtRT-PCR results at the Public Health Laboratory (Alberta, Canada) from January 21 to April 18, 2020 were reviewed to identify patients with an initial negative rtRT-PCR followed by a positive result on repeat testing within 14 days (defined as discordant results). Negative samples from these discordant specimens were re-tested using three alternate rtRT-PCR assays (targeting the E gene and N1/N2 regions of the nucleocapsid genes) to assess for false negative (FN) results.

Results

During the time period specified, 95,919 patients (100,001 samples) were tested for SARS-CoV-2. Of these, 49 patients were found to have discordant results including 49 positive and 52 negative swabs. Repeat testing of 52 negative swabs found five FNs (from five separate patients). Assuming 100% specificity of the diagnostic assay, the FNR and sensitivity in this group of patients with discordant testing was 9.3% (95% CI 1.5–17.0%) and 90.7% (95% CI 82.6–98.9%) respectively.

Conclusions

Studies to understand the FNR of routinely used assays are important to confirm adequate clinical performance. In this study, most FN results were due to low amounts of SARS-CoV-2 virus concentrations in patients with multiple specimens collected during different stages of infection. Post-test clinical evaluation of each patient is advised to ensure that rtRT-PCR results are not the only factor in excluding COVID-19.
Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Literature
23.
go back to reference Sullivan PS, Sailey C, Guest JL, Guarner J, Kelley C, Siegler AJ, et al. Detection of SARS-CoV-2 RNA and antibodies in diverse samples: protocol to validate the sufficiency of provider-observed, home-collected blood, saliva, and oropharyngeal samples. JMIR Public Health Surveill. 2020;6(2):e19054. https://doi.org/10.2196/19054.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Sullivan PS, Sailey C, Guest JL, Guarner J, Kelley C, Siegler AJ, et al. Detection of SARS-CoV-2 RNA and antibodies in diverse samples: protocol to validate the sufficiency of provider-observed, home-collected blood, saliva, and oropharyngeal samples. JMIR Public Health Surveill. 2020;6(2):e19054. https://​doi.​org/​10.​2196/​19054.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
Metadata
Title
False negative rate of COVID-19 PCR testing: a discordant testing analysis
Authors
Jamil N. Kanji
Nathan Zelyas
Clayton MacDonald
Kanti Pabbaraju
Muhammad Naeem Khan
Abhaya Prasad
Jia Hu
Mathew Diggle
Byron M. Berenger
Graham Tipples
Publication date
01-12-2021
Publisher
BioMed Central
Published in
Virology Journal / Issue 1/2021
Electronic ISSN: 1743-422X
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12985-021-01489-0

Other articles of this Issue 1/2021

Virology Journal 1/2021 Go to the issue